Cuitu negro-like climbs: Yes or no?

[sartoris]

I've heard quite a few people stating that climbing such ridiculously hard mountains like Cuitu Negro (or Zoncolan, Angliru, etc.) doesn't really make the stages any more interesting, and that the gaps between riders would have been greater in other type of climbs and stages. Even the Eurosport commentators in Spain were in favour of avoiding the superhard climbs. "No point in watching the riders crawling their way up to the end line", they said.

To me, yesterday's stage was pure joy. Maybe, as a cyclist I can appreciate the effort, suffering and will force of every single rider who gets to the top in stages like yesterday's.

Anyway, let's hear the experts' opinion.

 

[Eshnar]

I approve them as long as they're not overused. One silly steep climb in a GT is fine. Not more though.
And about time differences... I disagree, there's no proof these climbs create smaller gaps.

 

[Cookster15]

Agreed. The biggest problem with the Tour is it has no super super hard climbs like the Cuitu Negro, Zoncolan, Angliru or Mortirolo. The slow speeds and suffering of the riders on such climbs really makes it obvious to any non cyclist watching on TV just how brutal this sport can be.

 

[hrotha]

Yes, in moderation, and preferably as intermediate climbs when possible.

I believe the kind of spectacle they bring in relies mostly on the shock value of seeing the top riders crawling up a slope. When that wears off, what you get is not much.

 

[Netserk]

I voted no for one reason and that reason only. A climb that is 20 km, should end with 3 km way harder than the rest. It would be better if it was 15 km @ 12%

 

[roundabout]

Maybe. 2 of them in the same race? Hell no.

 

[Miburo]

Yeah why not but don't overdo it. Last 3 km of Bola del mundo is almost as bad as this.

 

[Maaaaaaaarten]

I think some riders said this was worse than Angliru or something.

3km at like 20% is just too much.

Seriously 10-15% does the trick, higher than that is just needless tormenting on the riders. Mountains like Angliru or Zoncolan are fine, walls like we had in that Mirador de Ezaro stage is fine, but this was just too crazy.

Besides, if it is a wall on top of a climb like this, it means thee entire is not used, only the little bit at the end.

 

[theyoungest]

You saw the real suffering was happening on the less steep parts, Froome asking the tv camera to please move away from the group so the pace might come down a little, Moreno and Roche dropped, Gesink looking like he was going to fall off his bike, the big three attacking.

Then when the super steep parts arrived nothing much happened. It's just not necessary to provide great racing.

 

[Carols]

It is spectacular for sure; but one per race is sufficient!

 

[No_Balls]

I like them. But i surely dont miss them when they are not scheduled either. It is much more to a race then a superhard climb and i agree with the point that they should avoid many of these mountains in one race.

Voted yes because i like diversity and the grueling part makes cycling more intresting when you could feel the suffering even at home.

 

[the asian]

Enjoyed the stage, so voted yes. However agree with most of the posters that only one of such climb should be in a GT. Both Cuitu Negru and Bola in the same race is a waste and a bit too much.

 

[burning]

I think it should be used as a penultimate climb, not a MTF

 

[Parrulo]

I approve them as long as they're not overused. One silly steep climb in a GT is fine. Not more though.
And about time differences... I disagree, there's no proof these climbs create smaller gaps.

Yes, in moderation, and preferably as intermediate climbs when possible.

I believe the kind of spectacle they bring in relies mostly on the shock value of seeing the top riders crawling up a slope. When that wears off, what you get is not much.

QFT!!!!

moderation is needed, this vuelta has become more of the same pretty fast with the silly gradients.

that's why i am more eager to watch fuente de then bola del mundo

 

[Fearless Greg Lemond]

No, this was too much, if I want to see this I will go and watch mountainbiking with their little a$$ gears.

 

[rgmerk]

Gearing, time cuts...

For professional riders, just to ride these climbs isn't that difficult if they gear their bike appropriately. If I can get up a 6km, 13% average climb with an FTP closer to 4 than 5 W/kg, I'm pretty sure any professional can manage. If they're silly enough to not fit appropriate gearing when it's available to them, that's their problem, not the parcours.

Where they might have a point is that more generous time cutoffs might be justified for really ridiculously steep climbs to be fair to the sprinters.

But for the GC contenders, it makes ******-all difference. They're going to be close to their maximum whether the gradient is 8% or 20%.

 

[Paco_P]

My impression is that longer steadier climbs make for more interesting racing. I don't see what the %20+ grade did for the spectator. Watching Cataldu wobble across the line gave me a desperate feeling - hoping he would not fall or get caught. The super steep parts seem a bit ridiculous - at the end - maybe if they were in the middle of the stage it would make things more interesting.

 

[nogav1ca]

Voted yes, but as others said, only one climb like that per race.

And next time they go up the Cuitu Negro, I bet it won't be only LTD who will use a compact at front. I think, that was also a reason why climb seemed even harder.

 

[Sophistic]

i dont get the fuzz...the last 3km were at 13% avg not 20%, the supersteep sections were not that long, if you can ride the Zoncolan, you can ride this as well. i dont understand how pro teams still cant get the right gearing for such climbs right...

 

[armchairclimber]

I'm at my armchairclimbing best on these stages. Yes, I find them gruelling...but compelling. My ideal stage would be the Angliru with the Shibden Wall at the top...climbing, brutal climbing and cobbles, all in one.

 

[LaFlorecita]

One per GT is enough.

 

[Arnout]

The Zoncolan always looked different than this. On the Zoncolan, riders are at least moving, even backmarkers and early breaks. The last three kms of Cuitu Negro were just too much, in my opinion.

Also, there is a big difference between 22% and 26%. Both steep, but at some point, one cannot go any slower anymore. I've done it (well, not as long as on this climb luckily).

 

[Arnout]

Also, sure, this type of climb tests endurance and willpower and everything, but attacking is not really possible. Tactical riding isn't either. Only thing you can do is follow your own tempo. Which means we won't see stunning attacks and counters. In this Vuelta, climbs are either too steep or to shallow, except the stage to Andorra, and that was, from a racing perspective at least, the best MTF stage in my opinion.

 

[hfer07]

Yes!! The Vuelta has just unveiled a new Angliru

gotta love the RTVE video when they show all the faces of the riders crossing the line entirely spent & begging for mercy-not that is good to see them that way, but it demonstrate how tough is that MTF....

Froome himself was ready to 'walk" in the last 100 meters..

 

[Red Rick]

It's not about the steepness, it's about the longivety of the steepness. On summer holiday this year, I did a climb with my dad which was only like 5% average, but it had parts where we were meant to push the bike up. I decided to try it on my bike for fun and I made it, even though my front wheel was coming from the ground each pedal stroke and i was dead and buried after only 50 m. I think the steepest part was at least 25%. Note that i'm not a cyclist and that i was pretty much untrained then but I still got up there